Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bug: Red Hat CoreOS incorrect IBM Cloud OS Image label name #8141

Open
sean-freeman opened this issue Mar 12, 2024 · 5 comments
Open

Bug: Red Hat CoreOS incorrect IBM Cloud OS Image label name #8141

sean-freeman opened this issue Mar 12, 2024 · 5 comments
Labels
lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.

Comments

@sean-freeman
Copy link

Version

All

Platform:

ibmcloud

Install types impacted:

  • ☑️ IPI (automated install with openshift-install)
  • ☑️ UPI (semi-manual installation on customised infrastructure)

What happened?

Import of the QCOW2 OS Image file into an IBM Cloud OS Image using incorrect label name, causes technical anomolies (such as not importing to different IaaS Profiles) and will cause report/audit issues for Red Hat.

The OS Image label name used in the code is rhel-coreos-stable-amd64, but it should be red-coreos-amd64-byol. This in two places:

The Web GUI shows this distinction in the clearest way:

image
image

What you expected to happen?

Correct OS Image label name should be used. If I recall correctly from 18 months ago, Red Hat initiated the request for red-coreos-amd64-byol OS Image label name for correct marketing name purposes and auditing purposes.

How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible)?

Run any installation to IBM Cloud, and the IBM Cloud OS Image will be imported incorrectly, as shown below in Web GUI (or CLI output):

image

Anything else we need to know?

When fixed, it should look like this in Web GUI or CLI output:

image

References

Previous commit where the OS Image label name was updated from Fedora CoreOS:
dcac9ac

@prb112
Copy link

prb112 commented Mar 12, 2024

@cjschaef thoughts?

@sean-freeman
Copy link
Author

@cjschaef bump?

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.

Mark the issue as fresh by commenting /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.
Exclude this issue from closing by commenting /lifecycle frozen.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle stale

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jul 25, 2024
@sean-freeman
Copy link
Author

/remove-lifecycle stale

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jul 25, 2024
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.

Mark the issue as fresh by commenting /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.
Exclude this issue from closing by commenting /lifecycle frozen.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle stale

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Oct 24, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants